Passionate about IP! Since June 2003 the IPKat has covered copyright, patent, trade mark, info-tech, privacy and confidentiality issues from a mainly UK and European perspective. The team is Neil J. Wilkof, Annsley Merelle Ward, Nicola Searle, Eleonora Rosati, and Merpel, with contributions from Mark Schweizer. Read, post comments and participate! E-mail the Kats here

The team is joined by Guest Kats Rosie Burbidge, Stephen Jones, Mathilde Pavis, and Eibhlin Vardy, and by InternKats Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo, Hayleigh Bosher, Tian Lu and Cecilia Sbrolli.

Guest Kat Stephen reports on an event
at UCL organised by the Institute of Brand and
Innovation Law (IBIL). The theme was how composers in the time of Mozart made
use of each other's material at a time before copyright law, compared with the
modern position.

Tian
reports on the 5th bi-annual TILTing Perspectives
conference held at Tilburg University in the Netherlands. This, the first of
two posts, focused on the healthcare sessions at the conference, including topics
such as robot doctors and algorithm therapists; robotic cognitive therapeutic
researchers and the law; and, expert systems and medical malpractice: reframing the
notion of negligence.

This is the second of two posts on the TILTing Perspectives conference
which reported on the panel discussions on new IP perspectives; the collective
management of copyright; and, copyright law making in the EU. As well as the
key note speech from Professor John M. Golden.

Mathilde
lets us know about the recent filing of a copyright infringement claim by internet chef Elizabeth LaBau (known as SugarHero) against Television
Food Network, relating to LaBau's cooking video of her flagship recipe “Snow
Globe Cupcakes”.

AmeriKat looks at the newly
anointed FRAND injunction from the recent case of Unwired Planet v Huawei FRAND. Following Huawei’s failure to comply with the terms of the worldwide licence (at
the time of the final judgment), a separate hearing was held at which the
injunction was granted. This is contrary to the normal position under English
law that once final relief is granted, parties are not entitled to come back to
court. However, in recognising the special nature of a FRAND undertaking, the
FRAND injunction is more flexible to allow parties to come back to court at the
expiry of the licence.

In a reference for a preliminary ruling, the French Council of State
asked the CJEU to clarify the compatibility of the 2012 French law on the
digital exploitation of out-of-print 20th century books with the InfoSoc
Directive. The CJEU stated that the system of the
InfoSoc Directive is one of broad and preventative rights. Although national
initiatives on out-of-commerce works are not against the directive per se, the
Court clarified that nonetheless authors, not collecting societies that do not
have any direct mandate from them, must consent to third-party uses of their
works.

In the case ofChugai Pharmaceutical v UCB [2017] EWHC
1216 (Pat)the Japanese pharmaceutical company
Chugai applied for a declaration that it did not have to continue paying
royalties to UCB under a patent licence. The licence was originally for a
portfolio of patentsrelating to an antibody known as
tocilizumab of which all but one (the 771 Patent) had expired. Some of its
tocilizumab products are manufactured and sold in the USA, so Chugai argued
that those products fall outside the scope of the claims of the 771 Patent,
meaning that it would no longer have to pay for them.

AIPPI/AIPLA event on 15 June 2017 at Bird & Bird for a discussion on
copyright law in the digital age with a particular focus on exhaustion of
rights and the development of digital marketplaces for pre-owned digital
copies.

PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATE

Never Too Late 150[week ending on Sunday 4 June] BREAKING: German court makes two (very important) copyright references
to the CJEU I Implausibly incredible or just plain insufficient? I Marks
misleading the public on the paternity of copyright works are
fraudulent - say French Supreme Court I Should the court be indifferent to
consumer indifference regarding the mark? I ‘Display At Your Own Risk’: A Tour
into ‘Copyright Surrogacy’ I To UPC or not to UPC? That is the question...
(Part 1) I Book Review: Patents for Technology Transfer I Event Report: Combat
the Copycats

Never Too Late 149[week ending on Sunday 28 May] IPSoc
Event Report: The ever-evolving law on the "communication to the
public" right
| Nestlé loses yet another KitKat
battle | Judge sounds alarm of
weakened US patent system, while industry groups start amending Section
101 | BREAKING: Supreme Court
limits US patentee's forum shopping capabilities | Shinder, Shinder, Shinder … will you ever be like
Tinder? | US Supreme Court uses
TC Heartland to blunt key troll tool, but will California welcome the next wave
of troll litigation? | Is there
copyright in the taste of a cheese? Sensory copyright finally makes its way to
CJEU | Big Data, products &
processes: being a German patentee in the era of the Rezeptortyrosinkinase
decisions | Life as an IP
Lawyer: Singapore | Appointed
Person issues first appeal decision in a design case | The meaning of "red carpet" in
two and three dimensions: from Ancient Greece to Cannes | Judge Alsup driving forward Uber-Waymo
trade secret dispute amongst "red flag" disclosure hearings | Monday Miscellany | Friday Fantasies.

Never Too Late 148[week ending on Sunday 21 May] Book
Review: Russell-Clarke and Howe on Industrial Designs I Scope of review by the
General Court of decisions by the EUIPO Board of Appeal: the last act in
LAGUIOLE I Dining out on trade marks - ZUMA - the own name defence for pets and
groundless threats I The popular China copyright monitoring website 101 I Where
are the women? Supreme Court hosts London launch of ChIPs with call to action
to advance women in tech, law and policy I Br*x*t and brands – out of the EU in
680 days I In memoriam: Adolph Kiefer, Olympic gold medalist, innovator and
inventor extraordinaire I Digital copies, exhaustion, and blockchains: lack of
legal clarity to be offset by technological advancement and evolving
consumption patterns? I German TV show allowed to call right wing politician
'Nazi sl*t', Hamburg court rules I Latest leak reveals that review of EU IP
enforcement framework is currently in a deadlock I Sunday Surprises, Around the
IP Blogs

Never Too Late 147[week ending on Sunday 7 May] Deterrence
sentencing for copyright infringement: Court of Appeal gives guidance I AIPPI
Event Report: Will the Unwired Planet v Huawei FRAND judgment lead to fewer
NPEs? I Unjustified Threats Bill receives royal assent I"Socialistic
brand": a unique category of vintage brand I Movement afoot in the patent
scene in Argentina I‘Right to be forgotten’ may potentially apply to all
top-level domains, says Swedish Data Protection Authority I A General Civil
Restraint Order against issuing further IP claims - Is this the end of the
Perry v Brundle saga? I Monday Miscellany, Wednesday Whimsies

IPKat Policies

This page summarises the IPKat policies on guest submissions and comments. If you have posted a comment to one of our blogposts and it hasn't appeared, it may be because it doesn't match our criteria for moderation. To learn more about our guest submissions, comments and complaints policy and the procedure for lodging a complaint click here.

Has the Kat got your tongue?

Just click the magic box below and get this page translated into a bewildering selection of languages!